Louisiana trigger law banning abortions temporarily blocked by court

NBC News / Comcast ^ | June 27, 2022 | By Chloe Atkins and David K. Li

[Oldeconomybuyer]

A Louisiana judge issued a temporary restraining order Monday against the state from enforcing its ban on abortions, leading to the immediate resumption of the procedure.

Orleans Parish Civil District Court Judge Robin Giarrusso granted the request of plaintiffs Hope Medical Group For Women and Medical Students for Choice.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday overturned Roe v. Wade, which for nearly 50 years had granted women the constitutional right to an abortion.

Providers in Louisiana had stopped performing abortions on Friday, unsure of the legality of the practice due to the vagueness of the bill, according to reproductive rights groups.

“Louisiana’s court made the right call today to swiftly block this unjust ban from taking effect," according to statement by Jenny Ma, senior staff attorney fo the Center for Reproductive Rights, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of the paintiffs.

[Saltmeat]

“Also, “I believe women who are survivors of rape or incest should be able determine whether to continue with a pregnancy that is the result of a criminal act,” Why is consensual incest included?”
_________________________________________________________
I hope that the answer to your question is the same as my opposition to abortion. That is to save the life of a innocent baby. The baby has committed no criminal act and should be protected.

[EvilCapitalist]

Who’s that guy?

[Tupelo]

Well, It looks like Orleans Parish Civil District Court Judge Robin Giarrusso is simply putting a hold on the new Louisiana state law tightly regulating abortions.

That to me is right where it should be argued.
10th Amendment, doncha know.

[NorthMountain]

Billie Jean is a dyke, so ...

yeah.

[gibsonguy]

It going to be chaos if they don’t smack this “Judge” down immediately.

[Adder]

Hey Judge...yer bosses said you were wrong...

[tired&retired]

[apillar]

Just what I predicted, don’t expect abortion to end anywhere without three or four more trips back to the Supreme Court. Just like they did with Heller, liberal Federal Judges will use every trick in the book to “discover” a different “right to an abortion” than the one struck down last week. Their goal is to buy time hoping to drag it out for years until perhaps the Supreme Court has a friendlier composition.

[kiryandil]

Why is there a United States Supreme Court if any two-bit judge can violate their ruling?

Another Democrat stooge-judge goes to bat for the DNC.

[DoodleDawg]

There are going to be a lot of these kind of injunctions because most of these kind of laws were passed for show and for headlines only, with the expectation that they would ever have to be enforced, As a result they’re badly written and full of loopholes. Legislatures just have to go back and plug the holes and fill in the gaps and everything will be fine.

[Rebelbase]

A Janet Reno with lipstick is still a Janet Reno.

[kiryandil]

Robin "DNC StoogeGirl" Giarrusso is a judge for Division G of the Orleans Parish Civil District Court in Louisiana. Her current term ends on December 31, 2026.

Giarrusso (Democratic Party) won re-election for the Division G judge of the Orleans Parish Civil District Court in Louisiana outright in the primary on November 3, 2020, after the general election was canceled.

[kiryandil]

The ugly face of a DNC stooge - Democrat Robin Giarusso.

It was this kind of partisan stooge who blocked investigation into The 2020 Steal.

[Little Ray]

No. Supremacy over the Louisiana state legislature and executive.
Remember, this was returned to the states to be fought out there.

[BenLurkin]

Dart board worthy.

[ducttape45]

Another activist judge.......

[mmichaels1970]

So... the Louisiana Judiciary is going to claim rights that the Supreme Court found belongs in the Legislature?

I would guess that 50 state judiciaries can now potentially do that. If the matter was returned to the states, it was returned to the jurisdictions of each state's individual government and constitution. Each state having its own Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches functioning in similar roles to how the federal branches work.

Therefore, a state legislative body could pass a law and a state judiciary branch could declare that law unconstitutional (applying their state constitution). I'd guess the state's executive branch (governor) could selectively determine how little or much he's going to enforce the law as well.

I don't know for sure, so I'm just spit-balling here. I'd guess that the fed judiciary sort of removed themselves from the argument. However, the states are free to argue the matter til the cows come home.

You could theoretically end up with 50 individual "Roe v Wades". That's why, to me, the overturning of Roe v Wade is a victory for federalism, but not quite such a slam-dunk victory over abortion. That's why I feel like the other side is extremely ticked off without realizing that they've got some power here as well.

Can anybody educate me better on where I might be wrong about that? I'm not an expert and I'm fine with being corrected here.

[plain talk]

Now that is a liberal judge.

Female? Check.
Short hair? Check.
Smarmy arrogant look on her face? Check.

[tired&retired]

Adam’s Apple... Check

[CraigEsq]

So... the Louisiana Judiciary is going to claim rights that the Supreme Court found belongs in the Legislature?

---

So technically it was left up to the STATES. A state court could find that a state’s constitution guarantees a right to abortion.